this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2024
452 points (95.0% liked)

World News

39209 readers
3343 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Russia’s ruble has plunged to its lowest level since March 2022 following new U.S. sanctions on Gazprombank, a key platform for energy payments.

The ruble’s slide, driven by sanctions, falling oil prices, and soaring defense spending, has intensified inflation and strained the war economy.

While the Kremlin benefits from a weaker ruble by converting foreign revenues into more domestic currency, experts warn of overheating risks and financial instability.

The Russian central bank is scrambling for solutions, but long-term economic pressures and declining oil revenues pose significant challenges.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 31 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

No, just most. War is the continuation of politics by different means, and political desires are quite often, but definitely not always, economical. Rome razed Carthage because of the economics of empires in the Mediterranean, yes, but Charlemagne didn't genocide Old Saxony for its economic output, but religious fervour and autocratic arrogance (the whole one god one pope one king thing).

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I think what they meant was that all wars need to be supported by the economy.
It's not enough to have soldiers, you also have to supply and feed them.

[–] mojofrododojo 1 points 2 days ago

you also have to supply and feed them.

yeah russia is actually experimenting with this part lol. and innovations like golfcarts and e-scooters on the battlefield.

[–] Maggoty 2 points 3 days ago

No it's an actual theory that posits all the other reasons are merely justifications for economic reasons.

It falls apart pretty badly if you look at World War 1. But there's also been a ton of wars that fit the theory, which is why it exists.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Beyond that, it's hard to get people who are comfortable in their lives to get up and go to war. If the nation is stable internally, if the people aren't desperate and angry, if they don't feel like they should have more - you know, for themselves - it's hard to get a motivated, aggressive military staffed and ready to attack their neighbors.

But also yes, an army marches on its stomach. Every major offensive beyond a nation's borders ends when the supply chain falters.